A monstrous Indricotherium (hornless rhino that could weigh up to 12-20 tons) becomes prey of an even more monstrous Crocodylus bugtiensis (first in Deviantart!)Remains of this colossal crocodile that could measure up to 11 meters long- in the same league as the famous Cretaceous supercrocs- have been found in Baluchistan, in the same rocks as Indricotherium. Even more- the fossil bones of the latter are often found with the bite marks of the croc, more proof that no matter how big you get, there will always be someone able to eat you.

I think this is what I love most about you, Hodari. You take the all the badass prehistoric monsters that nobody has heard of and give them life. I sometimes just browse wikipedia's page for largest prehistoric lifeforms and when I search for an artistic interpretation of them, yours is often the first result. So thank you, Hodari, for giving the other monsters of the past some much needed attention.

It's weird how there is very little info on these guys... you would think the media would eat this shit up since everyone and their parent believes that the giant "crocs" only lived the Mesozoic Era (despite the fact the Cenozoic having a whole lineage of land crocs that may have lived side-by-side with humans).

I didn't know this existed until I came across this in Donald Prothero's new indricothere book. I think it's pretty awesome. Do you mind if I share this with the actual author on Facebook? I honestly think he'd appreciate your art

This is so cool! Good to know there were still some toothy monsters kicking ass after the big rock dropped!However, I'm pretty sure that the name "Indricotherium" has been dropped in favor of "Paraceratherium".

Are known? there's only 3 cases of bite marks on dinosaur bones attributed to Deinosuchus, two on hadrosaurid remains, probably Kritosaurus and one in a small-ish theropod. Predation is not certain, however there's lots of turtle shells indicating that Deinosuchus frequently preyed on marine turtles.

There's no evidence of Sarcosuchus preying on any dinosaur, Sereno et al. conclusion basically says it could because its snout was more robust than in the gharial and that's it, when in fact its rostral proportion indicates that its snout was no wider than those of slender-snouted and freshwater crocodiles, that its snout was not only uniformly very shallow across all of its length (from 12 to 10cm) as it was its dentary but that the proportional size (most around 3 to 4cm, just 4 up to 7cm long), arrangement (equal to those of the much slender snouted Terminonaris and similar to that of Tomistoma) and number of its teeth (30 in the maxilla, much more than even the gharial) are more consistent with a mostly piscivorous diet, though given its size, full grown adults could have preyed and huge fish and small dinosaurs but there's nothing on Sarcosuchus anatomy indicating a macrophagus diet.

That's the smallish theropod I was referring to in my comment, I'm not denying that Sarcosuchus was probably like the false gharial and could take on small prey relative to itself like small dinosaurs, what I'm saying is that nothing of its anatomy suggests it could kill something of its own size or bigger.